Evidence of meeting #23 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crtc.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
St. Catharines, Lib.
It was that the CRTC, if there's a clear policy directive, can't scope in user-generated content if it's scoped out.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
Time has ended, so thank you very much, Chris and Mr. Menzies.
I'm going to go to the Bloc Québécois and Martin Champoux for two and a half minutes.
Go ahead, please.
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Menzies, earlier you said that audiovisual production in Canada is a $9.5 billion industry that's doing well.
Can you analyze the numbers and tell me, for example, what share independent production has in Canada and whether it's doing well?
12:20 p.m.
As an Individual
You'll have to ask somebody else on that. I don't have a whole list of data in front of me today to answer that question. No doubt—
12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
That's fine, Mr. Menzies.
Independent production, which is what we're trying to protect by regulatory means, is declining. That has been a concern for the industry for some time. It represents 31% of the $9.5 billion you mentioned, compared to production services, which are provided by foreign undertakings that produce in Canada and buy services, such as visual effects.
However, independent production, strictly speaking, is in decline. So it's false to say that the audiovisual industry is doing well in Canada. If we break down and look at the numbers, it seems quite clear this is an industry that could use a little protection from us.
I simply wanted to clarify that point because I thought the overall figure looked good, but the details sometimes reveal minor surprises that slightly misrepresent the actual situation.
Mr. Payette, I'm coming back to you because there's something very troubling here that I think is interfering in our discussion of Bill C‑11, and I'm referring to the issue of content generated by users. Earlier Ms. Fortier mentioned our fear about this.
What do you have to say to creators who earn a living by sharing content online, the digital-first creators, to win their support for the bill? What would you say to convince them that the bill isn't harmful, that it doesn't threaten them and, on the contrary, could help them?
12:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Professional Music Publishers' Association
Thank you for that question.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Excuse me, Mr. Payette. Could you please move to the appropriate mike? You're using your computer mike, and the interpreters are having a problem with that. Thank you.
I'll give extra time on this.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Director, Professional Music Publishers' Association
To answer your question, I'm not really sure of the definition of that term. Based on the one I've been given, they're creators who depend on platforms as a priority distribution method.
However, based on that definition, the music sector is digital first. So we have to pay attention to the meanings we attach to words and expressions. I'd like to take this opportunity to say that Digital First Canada doesn't represent all online content creators, at least, definitely not the music sector.
What troubles me is the lack of consideration the platforms give to local music. They need to do more for us. We're opposed to any change in the act that might limit the CRTC's power to ensure we benefit from regulations made under Bill C‑11.
However, if, at the regulation stage, some audiovisual content producers from outside the music sector are opposed to having undertakings' content distribution regulated, I'm sure the CRTC will take that into account. In fact, when we tell the CRTC that there's no point in regulating an activity, it generally tends not to do it. Our criticism in the past 20 years has been that it hasn't regulated certain activities enough.
Consequently, I don't think that creators who don't want to be protected by regulations have anything to fear—
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Mr. Payette. Our time is up.
I'm sorry about that, Martin, but the time is up.
I'm going to the New Democratic Party and Peter Julian for two and a half minutes, please.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
I'm going back to you, Mr. Reeb.
Thank you very much. You were cut off when we were talking about the level playing field and how important that is in Canada.
There are two parts to my question.
First off is how Bill C-11 sets a more effective level playing field. Second, though, in terms of Corus Entertainment, there is also another playing field that needs to be levelled, which is that of independent producers.
The Yale report spoke to fair treatment for independent producers. I want to get the Corus Entertainment response on that level playing field as well.
12:25 p.m.
Executive Vice-President, Broadcast Networks, Corus Entertainment Inc.
Thank you, Mr. Julian.
In terms of the independent production community, they have put forward a very strong case, which I won't make for them, that they need to have regulated amounts of production provided to them through the system. I'm sure they are arguing for that for any new digital broadcasters that would be brought into the system.
We already face a number of requirements. To access certain funds, we have to work with independent producers in our own production, and there are a myriad of other requirements for the kinds of programs that we can either produce internally or with external partners as the independent producers.
I think that's what we're talking about. It's that myriad layer of regulations we face as a Canadian company working in the broadcasting sector that our foreign competitors simply do not have to work with. There are two ways to solve that: Either you can increase the amount of regulation on the foreign competitors or you can decrease the amount of regulation on Canadian companies.
As I said in my opening statement, the status quo is not sustainable. We cannot continue to operate in a world where Canadian companies have all of the obligations put on them and the foreign competitors that are operating in the exact same marketplace face none of the same restrictions and obligations.
12:25 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Coming back to independent producers, we want to be fair to Canadian companies and Canadian content. We also want to be fair to independent producers. The Yale report is very clear in that regard. Is it your position that it is appropriate that the CRTC provide those supports for independent producers?
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I'm afraid, Peter, that question will have to wait until the next round. Thank you very much.
I am now going to the Conservatives and Mr. Uppal for five minutes.
12:25 p.m.
Tim Uppal Edmonton Mill Woods, CPC
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, witnesses.
I'm going to start with Mr. Menzies.
Mr. Menzies, as the former CRTC vice-chair, in your professional opinion, does the CRTC have the knowledge, the expertise, the tools to regulate content for Canadian streaming online?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
The CRTC has a lot of talented people there, but I don't think it has the structure yet to be able to regulate this. It needs to learn about issues like user-generated content, which is why it would be a good idea to take it out of the bill.
If you wanted to carve out just a single sector and find a way—as I suggested, find the $150 million somewhere—to divert that money or ensure that money is being reinvested into Canada, it could probably cope with that. However, the decisions that are left for it to make in Bill C-11, such as deciding what companies this applies to and that sort of stuff, are going to cause them to have to hire a lot of people and build a new area of expertise, because it's not broadcasting.
As some of the witnesses said here today.... Ms. Fortier pointed out that even the architects of the legislation don't seem to understand the businesses and the business structures they are trying to legislate. There is no reason that people would, unless they're involved in it. This isn't an area the CRTC has been involved in, so I would think it would need to expand its expertise.
12:30 p.m.
Edmonton Mill Woods, CPC
Obviously there are additional costs to expanding expertise, but what time frame do you think the CRTC would need to get to that point where it is able to properly monitor this content?
12:30 p.m.
As an Individual
I think it would probably unfold over about five years, particularly with all the other legislation that's coming forward to it. It's going to be doing newspapers and it's probably going to be doing online harm. I'm assuming why clause 4.2 is there. It has all kinds of things coming up.
It has a new chair coming in September and likely a new vice-chair of broadcasting as well. When senior leadership changes, it takes a year to figure out where the bathrooms are and that sort of stuff when you settle into a new job, and then have hearings.
I see a period of at least five years of uncertainty, and that's if all goes smoothly, which is my concern. I don't think it's in the best interest of Canada's creative sector to create this uncertainty, so move it along.
12:30 p.m.
Edmonton Mill Woods, CPC
Thank you.
Ms. Fortier, you have one of the most successful YouTube channels in Canada. It's really a Canadian content creator's dream situation. If Bill C-11 is passed and enters into law in its current form, how would it impact your business and other businesses like that, or businesses that are striving to be like your business?
12:30 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Skyship Entertainment Company
Even just in recent discussion, just to clarify some misconceptions, we need to understand that the platforms right now already operate on recommending content that audiences are looking for. YouTube does not, as an example, give us views. YouTube does not give any content creator views. As your channel grows—and that can take years, admittedly—you gain subscribers and you naturally have a larger audience base for your videos to be presented to. Even at that point, even for us, not every song we release is a hit. Sometimes it can take three years for a song to resonate.
Our views are not shuttered or stuffed in front of audiences' faces. People literally will look for our content or are watching content that is similar to ours. I honestly feel Monsieur Payette's pain points, but the beauty of digital content is that it is a niche audience base because it has global reach, as opposed to broadcasting, which is geographically niched but requires a broader audience.
Can content potentially be too niched to find an audience? That's possible, but there are so many other ways to grow content, whether it's through investment or infrastructure systems, like YouTube's Black voices fund in the U.S., or working with French language music content creators. There are so many other ways to bolster content and promote it. These platforms really do want more than one content creator to be successful. I think it's important that we understand that as we move forward.
This bill would affect us in a couple of different ways. Could it impact our global reach? Could it impact our regional reach? I am far more concerned about the content creators who are working today. AmandaMuse is a fantastic example. Over COVID, she single-handedly was the sole income earner for her household, because her husband, who is a pilot, lost his job. Are there millions of views? No, but they are still an impactful, important part of this culture.
I think there is far more we can be doing than artificially manipulating algorithms, which is directly affecting content creators.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Ms. Fortier. Your time is up.
Now we have five minutes for the Liberals, with Michael Coteau.
12:35 p.m.
Michael Coteau Don Valley East, Lib.
Thank you very much, Chair.
Thank you to all our witnesses for joining us today. It's been a very valuable conversation. Thank you so much.
My question is for Mr. Danks from OUTtv.
You mentioned that a shift has taken place in the distribution system in Canada. We've heard from people in the past that there's been a loss of control over what people are seeing and also the control of rights, of content. You mentioned that Bill C-11 would be an important tool to help ensure some equity within the system when it comes to distribution.
Can you talk about the equity piece to this and how putting in place a piece of legislation like this will help ensure there's greater equity within the distribution system in this country?
12:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, OUTtv Network Inc.
Yes. Thank you for getting this back to broadcasting. With no disrespect to our friends in YouTube and TikTok and such, the platforms that we need to access for greater revenue from what we're making in content are Amazon, Apple TV+, Roku and such, and they don't just admit your content directly, as YouTube and TikTok do. It's a huge difference that it's important for everybody to understand. You need to have a library of content. You need to have a refresh of content.
The challenge that we're going to face going forward is ensuring that we can get onto these platforms and get access to them, because they are controlled by foreign entities. OUTtv is not just on these platforms in Canada but around the world. We have been denied access on certain platforms in the U.S. and certain platforms in Asia simply due to LGBTQ content. Those same platforms will be coming to Canada at some point. Two of them that I won't mention by name are scheduled to launch in Canada in 2023, so there's a huge concern for Canadian broadcasters.
This would include APTN and other broadcasters, but even services that Mr. Reeb has at Corus might be faced with competition from a foreign service, or the foreign service just might say, “Sorry, but we're fully loaded. We have enough American services and we don't need Canadian services.” These are very real concerns. They're happening in the industry right now, and for us to continue in our business.... We have a different business model. We need a premium level of content.
As I've said, we've been successful. We've launched in the U.S. on various platforms. We're in Australia. We're in other ones around the world, but what we're seeing around the globe is that it's going to be tough out there. The starting point for Canadian broadcasters needs to be access to these online platforms in our country. That's why this is so fundamentally important to the broadcasting business. This very much separates us from the YouTubers and the TikTokers, who can get access and go global.
We are trying to get access and go global. We want that same business model, but it's much more difficult in the premium-level platforms. If we don't regulate this properly—if we don't have the CRTC's ability to tell Apple and Amazon that this channel is an important Canadian service and it's on your platform—then I'm worried that we're going to have real problems continuing with our services in Canada. That's why I focused on those items.
12:35 p.m.
Don Valley East, Lib.
Thank you so much.
Mr. Payette, I have a quick question for you.
In regard to francophone culture, what would a piece of legislation like this do to ensure that we continue to build a strong distribution of francophone culture here in this country and to ensure that it stays within a competitive space under this legislation?